매일 아침, 어제의 AI를 한 통으로 정리해 보내드립니다메일로 받아보기

METAL LAB

A Jagged Frontier: Evaluating Robustness of Code Agents to Semantics-Preserving Transformations

arXiv:2608.183892026-08-20

Table 1: Catalog of semantics-preserving transformations (SPTs).
TransformationSummary
If Else SwitcherSwaps if/else branches and negates the condition
For Loop RewritingRewrites a for loop using an explicit iterator
And Condition SplitterDecomposes if A and B into nested ifs
Comparison SwapperSwaps operands and inverts the operator
While Loop UnrollingUnrolls one iteration of a while loop
Double Negation InjectorWraps a condition in not not (⋅)
Commutative Operand PermuterReorders commutative operands
Local Variable RenamerRenames safe local variables to synonyms
If True WrapperWraps a block in a permanently true guard
Try Except InjectorWraps a block in a redundant try/except
Dead Code InjectorInserts an unreachable block
Dead String AssignmentInserts an unread variable assignment
Dead Method InjectionAppends an unreachable method to a class
String Literal SplitterSplits a string literal into a concatenation
Table 2: Comparison of mini-SWE and OpenCode Agent Scaffolds
Categorymini-SWEOpenCode
ArchitectureSingle, centralized agentPrimary agents invoke tools and subagents for specific tasks (e.g., Build, Plan, General, Explore)
Available Toolsbashbash, edit, write, read, grep, glob, lsp, apply_patch, skill, todo_write, web_fetch, web_search, question
Access RestrictionsNoneAvailable tools determined by an agent’s role and user configuration
Context ManagementContinuous, append-onlyMultiple, dynamically changing contexts for different subagents

본문에 싣지 못한 그림

  • Figure 1: Mean degradation Δ¯ (percentage points) for each model under each scaffold on both benchmarks. Error bars are fixed-population 95% bootstrap confidence intervals.
  • Figure 2: Mean relative change in agent steps (δ¯step) and cost (δ¯cost) after perturbation, for each scaffold–model configuration on the 28 SWE-bench Verified instances (left) and the 26 SWE-bench Pro instances (right), restricted to runs the agent resolved in both cases. Positive values mean perturbed runs take more steps, or cost more, than unperturbed runs on the same instance. Error bars are fixed-population 95% bootstrap confidence intervals.
  • Figure 3: Mean resolve rate (%) on unperturbed and perturbed runs for each model under each scaffold, on SWE-bench Verified (top) and SWE-bench Pro (bottom).
  • Figure 4: Mean relative change in agent steps (δ¯step) and cost (δ¯cost) after perturbation over all runs, for each scaffold–model configuration on the 28 SWE-bench Verified instances (left) and the 26 SWE-bench Pro instances (right). Positive values mean perturbed runs take more steps, or cost more, than unperturbed runs on the same instance. Error bars are fixed-population 95% bootstrap confidence intervals.
  • Figure 5: Per-instance degradation Δ⁡(i) for the 28 SWE-bench Verified instances under each configuration. Error bars are Newcombe 95% confidence intervals for the difference between the unperturbed and perturbed resolve proportions (n=20 runs per condition).
  • Figure 6: Per-instance degradation Δ⁡(i) for the 26 SWE-bench Pro instances under each configuration. Error bars are Newcombe 95% confidence intervals for the difference between the unperturbed and perturbed resolve proportions (n=20 runs per condition).
원문에서 그림 보기 →

AI code agents are increasingly deployed to resolve real software issues, yet their reliability under superficial code variations remains poorly understood. We evaluate whether coding agents that repair repository-level issues remain reliable when the surrounding codebase is rewritten into a semantically equivalent form. We introduce a random variant sampler that applies common semantics-preserving transformations (SPTs) - spanning control-flow rew

저자 · Hasan Najib Mahmud (Colorado State University), Shreya Gupta (Microsoft), Isha Chaudhary (University of Illinois Urbana-

arXiv에서 원문 보기

최신 논문

논문 전체 보기 →

METAL LAB 최신 기사